« previous next »
Pages: [1]

Author Topic: Complicated and two judges have their eyes on this  (Read 19401 times)

HeligKo

  • Silver Member
  • **
  • Posts: 5
Complicated and two judges have their eyes on this
« on: May 01, 2014, 05:10:09 PM »
I have 4 kids.

14 y/o is in DOC/JJA custody a.k.a the state of  Kansas has custody.

13,12,and 10 y/o are spending equal time with each parent. Mom pays direct expenses and we both purchase clothing.

What will get me closest to the right numbers. My lawyer will be using the commercial calculator, but I check his numbers constantly. Her lawyer tries to shortcut the calculations and just argue her point. Its usually double what it ought to be. Problem is for her to make those arguments means her client will pay more to the state as well.   We have to calculate what each of us has to pay to the state for the one child, and what I have to pay to her for the other 3.

I started to work these side by side, and it looks like if I use the MFC box, I will get the correct tables for 4 kids.  I believe we will have 3 worksheets. One for me and my son with the numbers on there. One for her and my son with the numbers on there. One for us. Regardless, we should be working from the tables that have 4 children. Not the tables with 3 children for one, and 1 child for the other.  Can someone with some knowledge or experience help make sure I am on the right track here.
Logged

BMull

  • Expert Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 45
Re: Complicated and two judges have their eyes on this
« Reply #1 on: May 01, 2014, 10:19:23 PM »
In my eyes, this is a 4 child family.  But I can see the complication with the custody involved.  If I'm reading your post correctly, the attorneys involved had different opinions?  I believe the "MFC" you mentioned is the "Multiple Family Application" or "MFA."  That method should lead to the same child support number.

From my point of view the 14yo is a separate case, but should be calculated with the MFA set at 3.  The rest of the kids are based on the shared residency equations and use and MFA of 1.

Can you share more details?
Logged

KTM

  • Expert Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 215
Re: Complicated and two judges have their eyes on this
« Reply #2 on: May 07, 2014, 12:16:14 PM »
IRS rules state that a child must reside with you 183 nights per year or more for you to be able to claim them as a deduction or credit on your return.

If the 14 year old child is in the custody of the state 183 nights or more in the past or current year than I do not believe that Kansas Guidelines would consider them a part of the economic formula for your family. That formula presumes any child would either be in your care or the other parents care for the child support formula. If the child is not in either parents care than I do not believe that they would be included in the formula until they are.

Logged

HeligKo

  • Silver Member
  • **
  • Posts: 5
Re: Complicated and two judges have their eyes on this
« Reply #3 on: May 07, 2014, 12:19:44 PM »
Not sure how the IRS rule applies, because the we both have to pay child support for the 14 year old, so if we were to calculate child support for the 3 separate from the 1, and then calculate for the 1, then its like I have two separate families and two separate incomes for those families.
Logged

KTM

  • Expert Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 215
Re: Complicated and two judges have their eyes on this
« Reply #4 on: May 08, 2014, 04:12:17 PM »
1. Who are you paying Child Support to for the 14 year old?
2. Was the support calculated before or after custody was given to the state?
3. If the person receiving support does not have residency of the child than I suggest you have the Order vacated.
Logged

HeligKo

  • Silver Member
  • **
  • Posts: 5
Re: Complicated and two judges have their eyes on this
« Reply #5 on: May 08, 2014, 04:18:07 PM »
1. Its been the mother.
2. It was calculated when we had 50/50 time with all 4 kids
3. That is being fixed.

This whole topic will be interesting for someone, but it doesn't matter to me anymore. The GAL in my case has decided that I shouldn't have equal time.   I am going to go mourn the lost time with my kids now. If anyone actually knows the answer or seen a similar case please answer so the next guy might know.
Logged
Pages: [1]
« previous next »